These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A double-blind, randomized trial of intravenous versus intramuscular antivenom for red-back spider envenoming.
    Author: Ellis RM, Sprivulis PC, Jelinek GA, Banham ND, Wood SV, Wilkes GJ, Siegmund A, Roberts BL.
    Journal: Emerg Med Australas; 2005 Apr; 17(2):152-6. PubMed ID: 15796730.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of intravenous versus intramuscular antivenom (AV) in the treatment of Red-back spider (RBS) envenoming. METHODS: Randomized, double-dummy, double-blind, multicentre trial of patients with red-back spider envenoming requiring AV treatment recruited from five hospital EDs in Western Australia. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were recruited; two were excluded; 33 were available for initial analysis, but two who were unblinded after one ampoule of trial AV and given i.v. AV had limited data; 31 remained in the study and had more complete data. After AV, pain scores for both i.m. and i.v. groups improved rapidly. At 24 h, the i.v. group was better with a 55% absolute difference (76% vs. 21%; 95% CI 25-85% difference) in the proportion pain-free. There were no safety issues. CONCLUSIONS: Red-back spider antivenom was initially effective by both i.m. and i.v. routes. The study generates the hypothesis that at 24 h, significantly more patients are pain-free with i.v. administration. Definitive recommendations on the optimal route of administration of RBS AV await the results of further studies.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]